Amanda Hall LAW OFFICES OF GROUP ONE State Bar No. 00000000 123 South Secondary Street San Jose, CA 95333 Phone: 408-555-1212 Fax: 408-555-1234 Attorney for PLAINTIFF, ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON, Plaintiff, vs. BEATRICE FOODS INC., A California Corporation, Defendant.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No.: 123456789 PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant, Beatrice Foods, INC. RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff, ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as A Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON PRELIMINARY STATEMENT It should be noted that this responding party has not fully completed investigation of the facts relating to this case and discovery is continuing in this action. All responses contained herein are based only upon such information and documents which are presently available to and specifically known to this responding party. It is anticipated that continuing discovery, independent investigation, legal research and analysis will supply additional facts resulting in further information and documents. The following responses are given without prejudice to this responding party’s right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts or documents. The responses contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply information and documents presently in this responding party’s custody, control and/or possession, or within his knowledge, but should in no way be to the prejudice of this responding party in relation to further discovery, research and analysis. GENERAL OBJECTIONS Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFF, ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON, (hereinafter, “Plaintiffs”) incorporate the following General Objections into their responses to each and every request for production/inspection: 1. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, compound, and not full and complete in and of itself, so as to make a response possible without speculation as to the meaning of the production. 2. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information protected by the attorney/client privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege. 3. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks plaintiff’s counsel’s legal reasoning, theory, or statutory basis supporting a factual conclusion. 4. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is unduly and unreasonably oppressive, harassing, annoying, burdensome, overbroad or constitutes an abuse of the discovery practice. 5. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information equally available to defendants or presumably within the knowledge of the defendants. Defendants can ascertain these documents from its own records or from other sources much more readily accessible to it than to Plaintiffs. 6. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is overly broad and seeks information neither relevant to the subject matter of the action, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving the foregoing objections, plaintiff responds as follows:
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff are attached hereto.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 3:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome, not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute and seeks documents which are equally available to the propounding party.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 4:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 5:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 6:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 7: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 8: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. RESPONSE TO NO. 9: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship. RESPONSE TO NO. 10: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship. RESPONSE TO NO. 11: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship. RESPONSE TO NO. 12: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship. RESPONSE TO NO. 13: In addition to the General Objections set forth above,which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. RESPONSE TO NO. 14: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. RESPONSE TO NO. 15: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. RESPONSE TO NO. 16: In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome, narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute and seeks documents which are equally available. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and Plaintiff will produce non-privileged documents that are relevant and responsive to this request that are in their possession, custody and control. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 17: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents may exist but respondent is unable to comply with this request on the basis that it demands information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 18: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents may exist but respondent is unable to comply with this request on the basis that it demands information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 19: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents shall be produced. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 20: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff shall be produced. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 21: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is equally available to the propounding party. However, all such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff shall be produced. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 22: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is equally available to the propounding party. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 23: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this interrogatory on the basis that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is equally available to the propounding party. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff shall be produced. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 24: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is equally available to the propounding party. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 25: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and the location of all documents is not known at this time. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 26: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and the location of all documents is not known at this time.. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 27: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: No such documents exist. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 28: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Please refer to water bills provided. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 29: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff objects to this request on the grounds it seeks documents or records that are that are not within the current knowledge, possession, custody or control of the Plaintiff. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 30: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: After a good faith search, no such documents were found. RESPONSE TO NO. 31: Plaintiff incorporates the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff further objects that this request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in effort to comply with this demand. Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request as the item(s) have been destroyed, lost or are no longer in the custody, possession, or control of the responding party. RESPONSE TO NO. 32: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. After engaging in diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request because the document is no longer in the plaintiff’s possession, custody or control. To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, the written items are currently in the possession, custody, or control of the CDC, of San Francisco, California. RESPONSE TO NO. 33: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. After engaging in diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request because the document is no longer in the plaintiff’s possession, custody or control. To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, the written items are currently in the possession, custody, or control of the CDC, of San Francisco, California. RESPONSE TO NO. 34: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects to this request on the grounds that it demands disclosure of information protected by privacy rights and work product rule. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in effort to comply with this demand. Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request as the item(s) have been destroyed, lost or are no longer in the custody, possession, or control of the responding party. RESPONSE TO NO. 35 Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copies of hospital, and medical records of James Anderson. RESPONSE TO NO. 36: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copy of the death certificate of James Anderson. RESPONSE TO NO. 37: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copy of the death certificate of James Anderson. RESPONSE TO NO. 38: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, after a diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff believes that documents responsive to this request are in defendant's possession. RESPONSE TO NO. 39: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, after a diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff believes that documents responsive to this request are in defendant's possession. RESPONSE TO NO. 40: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant. RESPONSE TO NO. 41: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant. RESPONSE TO NO. 42: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant. RESPONSE TO NO. 43: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant. RESPONSE TO NO. 44: Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information protected by the attorney/client privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege. Plaintiffs further object to this request for production to the extent that the request seeks plaintiff’s counsel’s legal reasoning, theory, or statutory basis supporting a factual conclusion. Dated: June 10, 1982 _ Amanda Hall Attorney for PLAINTIFF __ ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES AANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON
PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is LAW OFFICES OF GROUP ONE, 123 South Secondary Street, San Jose, CA 95333. On June 10, 1982, I served a copy of the below-listed document(s) described as: PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT BEATRICE FOODS INC. BY U.S. MAIL: I enclosed the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope or package, addressed to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth above and placed the envelope or package for collection and mailing, following this firm’s ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing of documents for mailing. Under that practice, on the same day that document(s) is/are placed for collection and mailing, it/they is/are deposited in the ordinary course of business with the U.S. Postal Service, in a sealed envelope or package with postage fully prepaid. BY FAX TRANSMISSION: I faxed the document(s) to the persons at the fax numbers listed above. No error was reported by the fax machine that I used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission containing the time, date, and sending fax machine telephone number, which I printed out, is available upon request. BY HAND-DELIVERY: I served the document(s) by placing it/them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed above and providing them to a professional messenger service for service. A copy of the professional messenger’s proof of delivery is available upon request. BY E-MAIL: I caused the document(s) to be served electronically on the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed below. BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the person(s) at the address(es) listed above. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June10, 1982, at San Jose, California. _ Amanda Hall
LAW OFFICES OF GROUP ONE
State Bar No. 00000000
123 South Secondary Street
San Jose, CA 95333
Phone: 408-555-1212
Fax: 408-555-1234
Attorney for PLAINTIFF,
ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and
as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES
ANDERSON, and as Administratrix
of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Plaintiff,
vs.
BEATRICE FOODS INC., A California Corporation,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff, ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as
A Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
It should be noted that this responding party has not fully completed investigation of the facts relating to this case and discovery is continuing in this action. All responses contained herein are based only upon such information and documents which are presently available to and specifically known to this responding party.
It is anticipated that continuing discovery, independent investigation, legal research and analysis will supply additional facts resulting in further information and documents. The following responses are given without prejudice to this responding party’s right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts or documents. The responses contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply information and documents presently in this responding party’s custody, control and/or possession, or within his knowledge, but should in no way be to the prejudice of this responding party in relation to further discovery, research and analysis.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFF, ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES ANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON, (hereinafter, “Plaintiffs”) incorporate the following General Objections into their responses to each and every request for production/inspection:
1. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, compound, and not full and complete in and of itself, so as to make a response possible without speculation as to the meaning of the production.
2. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information protected by the attorney/client privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege.
3. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks plaintiff’s counsel’s legal reasoning, theory, or statutory basis supporting a factual conclusion.
4. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is unduly and unreasonably oppressive, harassing, annoying, burdensome, overbroad or constitutes an abuse of the discovery practice.
5. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information equally available to defendants or presumably within the knowledge of the defendants. Defendants can ascertain these documents from its own records or from other sources much more readily accessible to it than to Plaintiffs.
6. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request is overly broad and seeks information neither relevant to the subject matter of the action, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
Without waiving the foregoing objections, plaintiff responds as follows:
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and
specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff
are attached hereto.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 3:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome, not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute and seeks documents which are equally available to the propounding party.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 4:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 5:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 6:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: no such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 7:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 8:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute.
RESPONSE TO NO. 9:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship.
RESPONSE TO NO. 10:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship.
RESPONSE TO NO. 11:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship.
RESPONSE TO NO. 12:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and is privileged under the physician-patient relationship.
RESPONSE TO NO. 13:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above,which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute.
RESPONSE TO NO. 14:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute.
RESPONSE TO NO. 15:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute.
RESPONSE TO NO. 16:
In addition to the General Objections set forth above, which are incorporated herein, plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is vague and ambiguous, overly broad, unduly burdensome, narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute and seeks documents which are equally available. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and Plaintiff will produce non-privileged documents that are relevant and responsive to this request that are in their possession, custody and control.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 17:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is
overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and
without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such
documents may exist but respondent is unable to comply with this request on the basis that it demands
information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 18:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is
overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and
without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such
documents may exist but respondent is unable to comply with this request on the basis that it demands
information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 19:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and
specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 20:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving
the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the
care and custody of Plaintiff shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 21:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that
Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is
equally available to the propounding party. However, all such documents in the care and custody of
Plaintiff shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 22:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that
Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is
equally available to the propounding party.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 23:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this interrogatory on the basis
that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is
equally available to the propounding party. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and
specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: All such documents in the care and custody of Plaintiff shall be produced.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 24: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that Plaintiff is not required to prepare the defendant’s case and this request seeks information that is equally available to the propounding party.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 25: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not narrowly tailored to the issues in dispute. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and the location of all documents is not known at this time.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 26: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Discovery is ongoing and the location of all documents is not known at this time..
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 27: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff further objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: No such documents exist.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 28: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Please refer to water bills
provided.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 29: Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Plaintiff objects to
this request on the grounds it seeks documents or records that are that are not within the current knowledge, possession, custody or control of the Plaintiff.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 30:
Plaintiff incorporates all General Objections. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing general and specific objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: After a good faith search, no such documents were found.
RESPONSE TO NO. 31:
Plaintiff incorporates the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff further objects that this request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in effort to comply with this demand. Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request as the item(s) have been destroyed, lost or are no longer in the custody, possession, or control of the responding party.
RESPONSE TO NO. 32:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. After engaging in diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request because the document is no longer in the plaintiff’s possession, custody or control. To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, the written items are currently in the possession, custody, or control of the CDC, of San Francisco, California.
RESPONSE TO NO. 33:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. After engaging in diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request because the document is no longer in the plaintiff’s possession, custody or control. To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, the written items are currently in the possession, custody, or control of the CDC, of San Francisco, California.
RESPONSE TO NO. 34:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects to this request on the grounds that it demands disclosure of information protected by privacy rights and work product rule. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in effort to comply with this demand. Plaintiff is unable to comply with this request as the item(s) have been destroyed, lost or are no longer in the custody, possession, or control of the responding party.
RESPONSE TO NO. 35
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copies of hospital, and medical records of James Anderson.
RESPONSE TO NO. 36:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copy of the death certificate of James Anderson.
RESPONSE TO NO. 37:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, Plaintiff will comply in part, and produces a copy of the death certificate of James Anderson.
RESPONSE TO NO. 38:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, after a diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff believes that documents responsive to this request are in defendant's possession.
RESPONSE TO NO. 39:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiff objects in that this request is unduly burdensome to the extent that the requested documents are equally available to defendant. Without waiving said objection, after a diligent search and reasonable inquiry, Plaintiff believes that documents responsive to this request are in defendant's possession.
RESPONSE TO NO. 40:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant.
RESPONSE TO NO. 41:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant.
RESPONSE TO NO. 42:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant.
RESPONSE TO NO. 43:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs further object to this demand on the grounds that the information sought by this demand is a public record which is readily available to Defendant.
RESPONSE TO NO. 44:
Plaintiffs incorporate the objections contained in the general objections above. Plaintiffs object to each and every request for production to the extent that the request seeks information protected by the attorney/client privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege. Plaintiffs further object to this request for production to the extent that the request seeks plaintiff’s counsel’s legal reasoning, theory, or statutory basis supporting a factual conclusion.
Dated: June 10, 1982
_
Amanda Hall
Attorney for PLAINTIFF
__
ANNE ANDERSON, for herself, and as a Parent and Next Friend of CHARLES AANDERSON, and as Administratrix of the Estate of JAMES ANDERSON
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am employed in the City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is LAW OFFICES OF GROUP ONE, 123 South Secondary Street, San Jose, CA 95333.
On June 10, 1982, I served a copy of the below-listed document(s) described as:
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT BEATRICE FOODS INC.
BY U.S. MAIL: I enclosed the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope or package, addressed to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth above and placed the envelope or package for collection and mailing, following this firm’s ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing of documents for mailing. Under that practice, on the same day that document(s) is/are placed for collection and mailing, it/they is/are deposited in the ordinary course of business with the U.S. Postal Service, in a sealed envelope or package with postage fully prepaid.
BY FAX TRANSMISSION: I faxed the document(s) to the persons at the fax numbers listed above. No error was reported by the fax machine that I used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission containing the time, date, and sending fax machine telephone number, which I printed out, is available upon request.
BY HAND-DELIVERY: I served the document(s) by placing it/them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed above and providing them to a professional messenger service for service. A copy of the professional messenger’s proof of delivery is available upon request.
BY E-MAIL: I caused the document(s) to be served electronically on the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed below.
BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the person(s) at the address(es) listed above. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.
Executed on June10, 1982, at San Jose, California.
_
Amanda Hall